Freelance journalist confronts Jim Calhoun, who channels Drew Rosenhaus

State level. Community level. National level.

They've all fucked up, royally, and we've let them do it because we keep voting the same idiots back into office time and time and time again.

 

Look, if people can just choose not to honor the terms of contracts because they don't feel it, what's the point of paying anything? I got it, I'll go get a nice, brand-new Lexus. I'll sign a four-year financing deal and just tell them to fuck themselves after month # 2.

 

It's not as if college contracts mean much these days.

 

I think the point was...

Because he does "give back" and obviously cares about people, he probably is feeling some guilt and would probably have opened up about it if the question had been posed properly, in the right setting.

Instead, this grandstanding asshole got Calhoun's Irish up and put him on the defensive, thereby reducing the whole issue to caveman-speak.

With "Not a dime back," Jim sort of became someone he isn't. That's what the point was.

The man does have a temper. I bet he'd be the first to admit that.

 

If the question had been posed properly in the right setting, the essence of Calhoun's answer wouldn't have changed: He would have pointed out the value (not just economic) he has brought to Connecticut in his 22 years and noted that there's only a handful of basketball coaches in the country who could be expected to bring similar results and that there is huge demand for their services. He probably would have deleted the "not one dime" reference and said he was not interested in renegotiating his existing contract.

Of course, had the reporter taken the 20 seconds required to understand this he would have realized it was a really stupid (and somewhat insulting) question and likely chosen not to pursue such an illogical line of thought.

 

I disagree.

I think this is a guy who is politically opinionated, politically left of center, and caught at the right moment, would have relished the opportunity to bend the ear of somebody seeking a more sophisticated approach to the story. And that's why I think Calhoun said he'd be happy to talk to the guy outside of the presser.

Yes, he might have gotten across the point about what he brings in, but there's more to it than that.

Again-- there's some history with this issue with regard to the state legislature, endorsement bans and how these coaches are classified. The "reporter" didn't bother to familiarize himself with any of the backstory or any of the facts.

It's more complex than, "You make lots of money - feel guilty?"

There's a decent story in there somewhere...

But it's all been turned into a stupid tit-for-tat barely even worthy of this thread.

 

First, I don't think Calhoun is nearly left of center as you think. In fact he's kind of old school in a lot of respects. Second, he doesn't suffer fools very well and this was clearly one of them. Third, there's no way Calhoun would allow past issues with the state to be brought unnecessarily brought into this discussion because they're not germane to the topic. Why make it sound like you're not giving money back because of some past slight? It would just sound like sour grapes.

His reason for not giving money back is simple and 100 percent legitimate: He has a contract and he's performing beyond exceptional with beyond exceptional results in terms of ROI and team performance. In other words, he's boosting state income nor draining from it.

Calhoun expects his contract to be honored, just like the state has a reason to expect that he honors the contract. It's a bogus issue.